Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #95

[SilentRogue]

I don’t know how the system works—but I feel a little skepticism. I’d think they’d need a court order—and if they’re dealing with the usual third-cousin hit on GEDmatch—I’m not sure if a judge would sign off on that sort of violation of privacy. I’m a passionate enthusiast for genetic genealogy in crime-solving, but I know it’s not as easy and certain as we might hope. And in many adoptions, the father’s identity is undocumented or uncertain—there goes half the family tree, right there.

They'd get a court order. They'd need probable cause, and a DNA of a family member is certainly probable cause. .

Here's the thing about GEDmatch. That's a non-issue. That's not an invasion of privacy. Let's take Joseph James DeAngelo, for instance. He abandoned his genetic material at a crime scene. There is no expectation of privacy. Now, a distant relative willingly submits their DNA to GEDmatch looking for a match. There is NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY.

It's actually easier and more certain than the public recognizes. Some states, as a matter of public policy, have disallowed the use of relative genetic material for various reasons, typically insurance rates and other non criminal matters.

However, this application is really cut and dry.

It does become a problem when you're forcing ancestry.com to give up samples, or violating terms of service, in order to get a match.

 

[Andreee]

I really struggle with catching up, I'm in the UK so when I wake up in the morning it's generally moved on to a new thread and I'm waaay behind.[/QUOTE
I know, right?!

 

[kiaatcher]

None of us have proof of anything, that’s for sure, but specific discussions re: potential weapons/kill kits, aspects of premeditation and motive are all fair game on WS and imo is not a “silly back and forth”

I'm sorry if I was being rude. Last night, IMO, the discussion was getting way too heated for a simple argument about what justifies as a kill kit, but my comment surely didn't resolve the issue. I'll work towards being more articulate and logical with my comments, rather than making an overall judgement.
On another topic: Does anyone think we'll get new information during this HLN special, or will it just be a recap of what has happened over the last two years? Either way I'm happy it's getting more coverage, and I definitely need a refresher on the info.

 

[margarita25]

Alright 23 minutes til the HLN special. I will do my best to correspond anything of note for those who are out of the country and can’t watch.

 

[Boxer]

Maybe some dashcam footage has been turned in to LE? Abandoned CPS building would have been visible from the highway, enough maybe to be caught on film?



If LE has DNA from the killer, wouldn't they go after perp possibles, especially the owner(s) of a suspiciously parked car, and get the perp's DNA to test from something the perp discards?

The vehicle was gone before the police search began at approximately 5:30 2/13/17.
But if the lot was randomly caught on police or other dash cam during that time, that would be great.

MOO in the following days to 2/14/17 there wasn't a huge specific public appeal about the vehicle that I recall.
That might mean police missed it as important at the time, which just seems unlikely to me, though bad errors do occur.

MOO what ever evidence or witness report that has come recently also had brought info about a vehicle parked there.

MOO any new evidence/witness info would have to be very strong to override the witness(es) and info that was used to create OBG 7/17/17 released sketch.

 

[ctmom]

Have the police clarified whether Libby's dad was or was not the person who saw the person in Sketch #2? We know that the sketch was drawn a few days after the murders, and that it was an eyewitness sketch. Is it possible that this was the guy that Libby's dad saw coming off the bridge who he asked about seeing two girls, and the person said, "No, I did not"? It would make sense to me that they would have him do an eyewitness sketch of that person, but if the person did not match the video (maybe he discarded his hat and jacket), they did not believe that person was BG? Just throwing this out there.

I think there's a good probability that Libby's dad was at least 1 of the witnesses that contributed to the newest sketch#2. This interview with the lead detective, ISP First Sgt. Jerry Holeman, alludes to that. He also states Libby's phone was found with the girls and that they did collect DNA evidence at the crime scene.
Lead detective in Delphi murders confirms police have more audio from phone, DNA evidence

 

[elmomom]

The vehicle was gone before the police search began at approximately 5:30 2/13/17.

MOO in the following days to 2/14/17 there wasn't a huge specific public appeal about the vehicle that I recall.
That might mean police missed it as important at the time, which just seems unlikely to me, though bad errors do occur.

MOO what ever evidence or witness report that has come recently also had brought info about a vehicle parked there.

MOO any new evidence/witness info would have to be very strong to override the witness(es) and info that was used to create OBG 7/17/17 released sketch.

Or, the vehicle was there when police arrived and now what they are in search of is a witness to place the vehicle there during the crime and a witness to seeing the person associated with the vehicle, at the vehicle and at approximately what time (like before the murders).

Moo

 

[marisab67]

If someone borrowed a vehicle [with permission], it's likely that whomever it was borrowed from has an idea of who committed the crime. I would be concerned that an individual who feels cornered, trapped, desperate, or who has nothing to lose might put that person (the owner of the vehicle) in harm's way. I sincerely hope that LE is keeping them (the possible person who loaned out the vehicle) safe, or at the very least keeping an eye on them.

Unless they borrowed the car from their mom.

 

[margarita25]

I'm sorry if I was being rude. Last night, IMO, the discussion was getting way too heated for a simple argument about what justifies as a kill kit, but my comment surely didn't resolve the issue. I'll work towards being more articulate and logical with my comments, rather than making an overall judgement.
On another topic: Does anyone think we'll get new information during this HLN special, or will it just be a recap of what has happened over the last two years? Either way I'm happy it's getting more coverage, and I definitely need a refresher on the info.

This is an emotional, tense, frustrating case, no doubt, and I think this tension comes out in the tone of some posts (I’ll speak for my own posts specifically), but this is not for the purpose of one being purposely combative. There’s just a lot of passion in here and differing thoughts and ideas.

Yes I’m happy for the coverage today. As for my personal thoughts, I am not expecting any groundbreaking news or epiphanies, but you never know! Whatever the case I’m all ears and as you said glad there is coverage.

 

[wary]

They'd get a court order. They'd need probable cause, and a DNA of a family member is certainly probable cause. .

Here's the thing about GEDmatch. That's a non-issue. That's not an invasion of privacy. Let's take Joseph James DeAngelo, for instance. He abandoned his genetic material at a crime scene. There is no expectation of privacy. Now, a distant relative willingly submits their DNA to GEDmatch looking for a match. There is NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY.

It's actually easier and more certain than the public recognizes. Some states, as a matter of public policy, have disallowed the use of relative genetic material for various reasons, typically insurance rates and other non criminal matters.

However, this application is really cut and dry.

It does become a problem when you're forcing ancestry.com to give up samples, or violating terms of service, in order to get a match.

I totally agree that using GEDmatch is NOT a violation of privacy.

My point was that getting a court order to release sealed adoption records, when you have perhaps 1% chance that the adoption records are of your possible suspect, might be rather iffy, in terms of privacy. (Percentages come from estimates I’ve heard of how many third cousins we have out there.)

However, this is probably all a moot point. We have no idea whether they even have DNA that can be linked to the crime.

 

[Inthedetails]

Very recently a new match for 3rd cousin popped up on my ancestry account, and as a 2nd cousin to my mother’s dna. It took me about 10 milliseconds to realize that we had an “unknown event” that led to the birth of this individual. Using match %’s to various relatives of mine and this person I was able to narrow down the paternity to about 3 potential relatives of mine. The new cousin had no idea that his/her father was a relative of mine and was in completely disbelief until the biological father submitted his DNA and he matched to this person as in the range of parent. It is not hard to do even if one is adopted or parented by an unknown and unsuspected person.

A cousin-once-removed found me through ancestry - there was an adoption a couple of generations back and she was trying to find bio family. She found me even though I have never done my DNA - but I do have a family tree on ancestry.

If they have perp's DNA and anyone in his remote family tree has done DNA, they could figure out who he is or close family members even if those close family members haven't submitted DNA. I know that is obvious to anyone on those sites, but just thought I'd mention it.

(An aside: People can be found through DNA even if they haven't submitted their spit, which isn't something people who want to protect their privacy don't want to hear.)

jm

 

[MassGuy]

I'm sorry if I was being rude. Last night, IMO, the discussion was getting way too heated for a simple argument about what justifies as a kill kit, but my comment surely didn't resolve the issue. I'll work towards being more articulate and logical with my comments, rather than making an overall judgement.
On another topic: Does anyone think we'll get new information during this HLN special, or will it just be a recap of what has happened over the last two years? Either way I'm happy it's getting more coverage, and I definitely need a refresher on the info.

I think this will simply be a rehash of what we already know. I have no expectation that it will break any new ground.

They’ve done this sort of thing with several cases recently. It’ll be a good refresher for most of us, but there almost certainly will be no new developments.

Anything new would have broken by now.

 

[Inthedetails]

Alright 23 minutes til the HLN special. I will do my best to correspond anything of note for those who are out of the country and can’t watch.

And for those of in the country and can't watch!

Thanks, M!

 

[apples12]

I think this will simply be a rehash of what we already know. I have no expectation that it will break any new ground.

They’ve done this sort of thing with several cases recently. It’ll be a good refresher for most of us, but there almost certainly will be no new developments.

Anything new would have broken by now.

For sure we will get a reminder from LE about not stalking/naming/posting people on social media who look like the sketch. I bet a lot of that is going on.

 

[MassGuy]

I totally agree that using GEDmatch is NOT a violation of privacy.

My point was that getting a court order to release sealed adoption records, when you have perhaps 1% chance that the adoption records are of your possible suspect, might be rather iffy, in terms of privacy. (Percentages come from estimates I’ve heard of how many third cousins we have out there.)

However, this is probably all a moot point. We have no idea whether they even have DNA that can be linked to the crime.

I think it’s moot as well. I’ve seen no signs that they’ve explored that route, and believe there’s a reason for that:

The DNA evidence they do have, is either of undetermined origin, or it isn’t a sample good enough to explore these more advanced techniques.

I’ve seen Parabon contacted within months of a murder, and a profile released. It’s been two years here.

 

[taximama24]

I can't find the thread to quote it but to the poster who referenced the scanner thread and the interesting connection between that and the religious innuendos of the presser and NSG, I think I get your train of thought on that (I would add that the bio on that link has an equally interesting hobby listed) but it can't be discussed on that thread and I think it would violate TOS on this thread too to elaborate...argh!

 

[TTF14]

Unless they borrowed the car from their mom.

A mom could still be in danger if her son was angry or desperate enough.

 

[TTF14]

I can't find the thread to quote it but to the poster who referenced the scanner thread and the interesting connection between that and the religious innuendos of the presser and NSG, I think I get your train of thought on that. The bio on that link has an equally interesting hobby listed.

What link?

 

[MassGuy]

For sure we will get a reminder from LE about not stalking/naming/posting people on social media who look like the sketch. I bet a lot of that is going on.

Yeah, I’ve stopped looking at social media related to this case, for that exact reason.

I’m literally seeing posts about people recounting the tips they have called in.

If I see any more “investigative strategies law enforcement should be pursuing,” I’m going to throw my phone.

That is not a tip. That is not helpful.

 

[TTF14]

I think it’s moot as well. I’ve seen no signs that they’ve explored that route, and believe there’s a reason for that:

The DNA evidence they do have, is either of undetermined origin, or it isn’t a sample good enough to explore these more advanced techniques.

I’ve seen Parabon contacted within months of a murder, and a profile released. It’s been two years here.

Does DNA have to be of a particular kind or grade for Parabon?